Is the age of the .40 S&W (and maybe .357 SIG) over?

[mavracer]

Not in this case.

Well yes it is you haven't offered any thing to the discussion other than an appeal to authority.
You can't seam to do anything but parrot the current 9mm is the best compromise mantras.
Problem is best compromise is an oxymoron.

 

[JCooperfan1911]

.40s are too abundant to go away so soon. I don’t think it’s as “extinct” as some people seem to think.

.357 SIG? Yeah, that one’s on the way out I think. I can’t remember the last time I spoke to anyone who actually shoots that cartridge. I never find brass for them on the ground or in the bins at the range, and availability in my area was scarce even pre-covid. That one’s on life support at best IMHO.

 

[Kleanbore]

Well yes it is you haven't offered any thing to the discussion other than an appeal to authority.
You can't seam to do anything but parrot the current 9mm is the best compromise mantras.
Problem is best compromise is an oxymoron.

Bull!

 

[Kleanbore]

.40s are too abundant to go away so soon.

Agree.

357 SIG? Yeah, that one’s on the way out I think.

Agree.

 

[mavracer]

Bull!

Then answer the question in your own words.
Why is 1.5x.355 good enough to overlook the added recoil required to expand said bullet and still penetrate to X depth, but the added recoil to expand a .400 bullet 1.5X not overlooked?

 

[mcb]

Within the context of the OP question is does not matter if the reason 40S&W and 357 Sig are loosing their market share is for "valid" reasons or not. The data is there, both cartridge, especially 40S&W, are loosing market share. 40S&W is loosing it reasonable fast for such relatively young cartridge that was reasonable popular just a short time ago.

Betamax lost to VHS and it was not because is was the inferior video storage media but because its benefits did not offset is cost.

 

[Kleanbore]

Why is 1.5x.355 good enough to overlook the added recoil required to expand said bullet and still penetrate to X depth, but the added recoil to expand a .400 bullet 1.5X not overlooked?

Because the recoil makes a difference, and any effect due to the increase in the expanded diameter is not considered material.

Where have you been?

Within the context of the OP question is does not matter if the reason 40S&W and 357 Sig are loosing their market share is for "valid" reasons or not. The data is there, both cartridge, especially 40S&W, are loosing market share.

That's it.

 

[mavracer]

Because the recoil makes a difference, and any effect due to the increase in the expanded diameter is not considered material.

For the umpteenth time then why increase recoil expanding a 9mm?????????????????

 

[Kleanbore]

For the umpteenth time then why increase recoil expanding a 9mm?????????????????

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Within the context of the OP question is does not matter if the reason 40S&W and 357 Sig are loosing their market share is for "valid" reasons or not. The data is there, both cartridge, especially 40S&W, are loosing market share. 40S&W is loosing it reasonable fast for such relatively young cartridge that was reasonable popular just a short time ago.

Betamax lost to VHS and it was not because is was the inferior video storage media but because its benefits did not offset is cost.

I said something like that two pages back, “when we're talking about product platform popularity and market forces, we're not really talking about practicality or what's in the field already.” Arguments built on which cartridge is best aren’t relevant. Look at the press reporting, the political/policy implications, and follow the money.

Always follow the money.

 

[WrongHanded]

For the umpteenth time then why increase recoil expanding a 9mm?????????????????

Ooh, ooh, I think I know!

I think it's because an expanded 9mm bullet makes a bigger hole than one that isn't expanded.

But to make it expand and go between 12 and 18" into ballistic gel after going through 4 layers of denim, requires more velocity and therefore more recoil than with a bullet that doesn't expand.

But wait.....if a bigger hole is better than a smaller hole, and the cost for that is more recoil.... wouldn't that same concept apply to .40? A bigger hole than a 9mm, but it cost more recoil?

Wow! This is super confusing. I understand why some guys are having a hard time with it.

 

[mavracer]

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

You seriously don't understand that more power is required to expand a bullet and penetrate to the same depth?
Or that more power equals more recoil?

 

[mavracer]

Ooh, ooh, I think I know!

I think it's because an expanded 9mm bullet makes a bigger hole than one that isn't expanded.

But to make it expand and go between 12 and 18" into ballistic gel after going through 4 layers of denim, requires more velocity and therefore more recoil than with a bullet that doesn't expand.

But wait.....if a bigger hole is better than a smaller hole, and the cost for that is more recoil.... wouldn't that same concept apply to .40? A bigger hole than a 9mm, but it cost more recoil?

Wow! This is super confusing. I understand why some guys are having a hard time with it.

There really needs to be a love post function.

 

[Kleanbore]

But to make it expand and go between 12 and 18" into ballistic gel after going through 4 layers of denim, requires more velocity and therefore more recoil than with a bullet that doesn't expand.

Yes, and the recoil for the same bullet is proportional to the square of the velocity. Recoil does not increase very much as velocity is increased.

But wait.....if a bigger hole is better than a smaller hole, and the cost for that is more recoil.... wouldn't that same concept apply to .40? A bigger hole than a 9mm, but it cost more recoil?

The .40 bullet has more mass. Recoil is directly proportional to mass.

You seriously don't understand that more power is required to expand a bullet and penetrate to the same depth?
Or that more power equals more recoil?

What is the reason for your question?

 

[WrongHanded]

Yes, and the recoil for the same bullet is proportional to the square of the velocity. Recoil does not increase very much as velocity is increased.

Oh really? Then why do people complain about the recoil of .357 Sig when compared to 9mm? "It's so snappy and beats up guns so much quicker!"

 

[Kleanbore]

Oh really? Then why do people complain about the recoil of .357 Sig when compared to 9mm? "It's so snappy and beats up guns so much quicker!"

Quite obviously, it is a matter of degree, as far as velocity is concerned.

Basic physics.

 

[Hartkopf]

Bots are picking up on this caliber war!

 

[mavracer]

Yes, and the recoil for the same bullet is proportional to the square of the velocity. Recoil does not increase very much as velocity is increased.

No reason to use the same weight bullet an unexpanded 115 would have a much higher SD than a much heavier bullet expanded to 1.5 diameter.

The .40 bullet has more mass. Recoil is directly proportional to mass.

Recoil energy and momentum are figured the same way as the projectiles.
So you're statements are backward recoil energy goes up exponentially with velocity and linear with mass.

 

[mcb]

No reason to use the same weight bullet an unexpanded 115 would have a much higher SD than a much heavier bullet expanded to 1.5 diameter.

Recoil energy and momentum are figured the same way as the projectiles.
So you're statements are backward recoil energy goes up exponentially with velocity and linear with mass.

Actually kinetic energy goes up with the square of the velocity. KE =0.5*m*V^2.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

No reason to use the same weight bullet an unexpanded 115 would have a much higher SD than a much heavier bullet expanded to 1.5 diameter.

Recoil energy and momentum are figured the same way as the projectiles.
So you're statements are backward recoil energy goes up exponentially with velocity and linear with mass.

You’re both missing the key point: recoil is perceptive, which means it’s also adaptive. Recoil response has zero to do with physics and everything to do with individual perceptions. I can two-finger a P-64 Radom 9mm Makarov without discomfort. To me the recoil is negligible. That’s not the common perception of that pistol in that caliber, especially not with full military loads; but that’s me.

By arguing over recoil as a marketing factor you are assuming recoil response is a static, known quantity and that is simply false.

Any analysis of sales or production data comparing pre- to mid- and post-plandemic data which tries to draw a solid conclusion about future market share is flawed. That’s a fact. As the labor, construction, and housing analysis have found, there is no compensating factor which can be used to normalize the data. Lost sales to law enforcement is a blow to new service grade manufacturing; but increases secondary product demand; which places pressure on the supply chain. Simple.

 

[GeoDudeFlorida]

Actually kinetic energy goes up with the square of the velocity. KE =0.5*m*V^2.

F=mA. Always. Everywhere in the known Universe.

 

[mavracer]

Actually kinetic energy goes up with the square of the velocity. KE =0.5*m*V^2.

KE = 0.5 * m * v² or KE=0.5*m*V*V
The little number above the V that denotes square is called an exponent hence when a factor is squared the increase is exponential to that factor.

 

[mavracer]

By arguing over recoil as a marketing factor you are assuming recoil response is a static, known quantity and that is simply false.

Absolutely recoil is very subjective and there are several design factors that can affect it as well.
One I've found is several of the better designed 40s have just a smidge more mass in the slide.
Some are even easily seen externally IE my FNS 40

 

[WrongHanded]

Quite obviously, it is a matter of degree, as far as velocity is concerned.

Basic physics.

Then why even try and argue against it in the first place? If you're willing to say anything to try and win an argument, eventually you're going to contradict yourself.

 

[Buzznrose]

But... but... but we are so good at beating dead horses!

That’s because more than a few of us are too slow to catch a live horse for a good beating...

I only have one .40 gun, a Glock 23. Been eyeing a new Gen 5 .22 or .23 lately.